New ask Hacker News story: Is the Standard Model overfitting or am I curve-fitting?
Is the Standard Model overfitting or am I curve-fitting?
2 by albert_roca | 7 comments on Hacker News.
I am developing a geometric model of physical interactions based on geometric constraints (w = 2, δ = √5 ) and topological invariants. No free parameters, just geometry. In your opinion, is this a legitimate geometric unification or just sophisticated curve-fitting? Results: Proton radius (r_p): Modeled as a tetrahedral structural limit (4 · ƛ) with spherical field projection loss (α / 4 · π). r_p = 4 · ƛ_p · (1 - (α / (4 · π))) Pred: 8.407470 × 10^-16 m Exp: 8.4075(64) × 10^-16 m Diff: 3 ppm Proton magnetic moment (g_p): Derived from the dynamic potential (δ = √5 ) damped by a golden friction term (α / Φ). g_p = (δ^3 / w) - (α / Φ) Pred: 5.5856599 Exp: 5.5856947 Diff: 6 ppm Muon anomaly (a_μ): Derived as a hierarchical resolution of the icosahedral geometry: surface (α / 2 · π) + nodes (α^2 / 12) + vertex symmetry (α^3 / 5). a_μ = (α / (2 · π)) + (α^2 / 12) + (α^3 / 5) Pred: 0.00116592506 Exp: 0.00116592059 Diff: 4 ppm α particle radius (r_α): Modeled as a 4-nucleon tetrahedron (8 · ƛ) with a linear nucleonic projection cost (α / π). r_α = 8 · ƛ_p · (1 - (α / π)) Pred: 1.67856 × 10^-15 m Exp: 1.678 × 10^-15 m Diff: 330 ppm Proton mass (m_p): Connecting the Planck scale to proton scale via a 64-bit metric horizon (2^64) and diagonal transmission (√2 ). m_p = ((√2 · m_P) / 2^64) · (1 + α / 3) Pred: 1.67260849206 × 10^-27 kg Exp: 1.67262192595(52) × 10^-27 kg Diff: 8 ppm Neutron-proton mass difference (∆_m): Modeled as potential energy stored in the geometric compression of the electron (icosahedron, 20 faces) into the protonic frame (cube, 8 vertices). Compression ratio = 20/8 = 5/2. ∆_m = m_e · ((5/2) + 4 · α + (α / 4)) Pred: 1.293345 MeV Exp: 1.293332 MeV. Diff: 10 ppm. Gravitational constant (G) without G: Derived from quantum constants and the proton mass, identifying G as a scaling artifact of the 128-bit hierarchy (2^128). G = (ħ · c · 2 · (1 + α / 3)^2) / (m_p^2 · 2^128) Pred: 6.6742439706 × 10^-11 Exp: 6.67430(15) × 10^-11 m^3 · kg^-1 · s^-2 Diff: 8 ppm Fine-structure constant (α): Derived as the static spatial cost plus a spinor loop correction. α^-1 = (4 · π^3 + π^2 + π) - (α / 24) Pred: 137.0359996 Exp: 137.0359991 Diff: < 0.005 ppm Preprint: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17847770
2 by albert_roca | 7 comments on Hacker News.
I am developing a geometric model of physical interactions based on geometric constraints (w = 2, δ = √5 ) and topological invariants. No free parameters, just geometry. In your opinion, is this a legitimate geometric unification or just sophisticated curve-fitting? Results: Proton radius (r_p): Modeled as a tetrahedral structural limit (4 · ƛ) with spherical field projection loss (α / 4 · π). r_p = 4 · ƛ_p · (1 - (α / (4 · π))) Pred: 8.407470 × 10^-16 m Exp: 8.4075(64) × 10^-16 m Diff: 3 ppm Proton magnetic moment (g_p): Derived from the dynamic potential (δ = √5 ) damped by a golden friction term (α / Φ). g_p = (δ^3 / w) - (α / Φ) Pred: 5.5856599 Exp: 5.5856947 Diff: 6 ppm Muon anomaly (a_μ): Derived as a hierarchical resolution of the icosahedral geometry: surface (α / 2 · π) + nodes (α^2 / 12) + vertex symmetry (α^3 / 5). a_μ = (α / (2 · π)) + (α^2 / 12) + (α^3 / 5) Pred: 0.00116592506 Exp: 0.00116592059 Diff: 4 ppm α particle radius (r_α): Modeled as a 4-nucleon tetrahedron (8 · ƛ) with a linear nucleonic projection cost (α / π). r_α = 8 · ƛ_p · (1 - (α / π)) Pred: 1.67856 × 10^-15 m Exp: 1.678 × 10^-15 m Diff: 330 ppm Proton mass (m_p): Connecting the Planck scale to proton scale via a 64-bit metric horizon (2^64) and diagonal transmission (√2 ). m_p = ((√2 · m_P) / 2^64) · (1 + α / 3) Pred: 1.67260849206 × 10^-27 kg Exp: 1.67262192595(52) × 10^-27 kg Diff: 8 ppm Neutron-proton mass difference (∆_m): Modeled as potential energy stored in the geometric compression of the electron (icosahedron, 20 faces) into the protonic frame (cube, 8 vertices). Compression ratio = 20/8 = 5/2. ∆_m = m_e · ((5/2) + 4 · α + (α / 4)) Pred: 1.293345 MeV Exp: 1.293332 MeV. Diff: 10 ppm. Gravitational constant (G) without G: Derived from quantum constants and the proton mass, identifying G as a scaling artifact of the 128-bit hierarchy (2^128). G = (ħ · c · 2 · (1 + α / 3)^2) / (m_p^2 · 2^128) Pred: 6.6742439706 × 10^-11 Exp: 6.67430(15) × 10^-11 m^3 · kg^-1 · s^-2 Diff: 8 ppm Fine-structure constant (α): Derived as the static spatial cost plus a spinor loop correction. α^-1 = (4 · π^3 + π^2 + π) - (α / 24) Pred: 137.0359996 Exp: 137.0359991 Diff: < 0.005 ppm Preprint: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17847770
Comments
Post a Comment